City of Los Angeles Charter Amendment II is Not in the Best Interest of the People

City of Los Angeles Charter Amendment II is Not in the Best Interest of the People

As Los Angeles voters, we face an important decision with City of Los Angeles Charter Amendment II. While the amendment proposes changes to streamline city , it raises significant concerns about its impact on the community and individual rights. 

Key Concerns:
Erosion of Public Resources:
This amendment allows city departments to sell food and merchandise to support operations. While it may sound beneficial, this approach could lead to commercialization of public services that should be funded by taxpayer dollars. Instead of relying on revenue from sales, the city should prioritize effective management of existing resources without taking more from the people.

Non-Discrimination Policies:
Including gender identity in non-discrimination rules for city employment raises concerns about the implications for religious freedom and personal beliefs. Many individuals and organizations have deeply held convictions about gender and sex, and this amendment could infringe upon their rights by forcing compliance with policies that contradict their values.

Potential for Bureaucratic Overreach:
The clarification of the Board of Airport Commissioners’ authority to establish fees and regulations may lead to increased costs for travelers. If this power is not checked, it could result in fees that burden the very citizens who use these facilities, without tangible improvements in service or infrastructure.

Administrative Changes Without Accountability:
The changes to titles and processes, including electronic signatures, may not fundamentally improve city governance. Instead, they could introduce unnecessary complexity and confusion in administrative procedures without addressing the underlying issues of inefficiency and lack of transparency.

Local Control and Decision-Making:
Allowing the city to lease public park sites to the Los Angeles Unified School District, while potentially beneficial, raises questions about who gets to make decisions regarding public spaces. The community should have a say in how public parks are used, rather than allowing bureaucratic decisions to dictate their fate.

Conclusion:
City of Los Angeles Charter Amendment II claims to promote inclusivity and efficiency, but it risks undermining the very principles that empower our community. By prioritizing administrative convenience over the rights and voices of the people, we may lose sight of what truly matters: serving the interests of all Angelenos.

Back to blog

Leave a comment